Inducing cultural change
for excellence
without gender bias
Prof. Dr. Jadranka Gvozdanović, Heidelberg
University/LERU Gender Steering Group
Academia is loosing female talent
Academia in Europe is still losing a considerable amount of ist research
capacity (from an approximately even distribution at graduation to only
13% of heads of universities in Europe).
There are many varieties of the „leaky pipeline“, but it always „leaks“.
Priorities for universities (LERU position paper Women, research and
universities: excellence without gender bias, 2012):
- strong determination of the university leadership; vision and strategy;
- measures should be aimed at achieving structural change;
-achieve transparency, accountability and monitoring;
- promote and support a gender dimension in research.
http://www.leru.org/files/publications/LERU_Paper_Women_universities_and_research.pdf
ERA Progress Report
European Research Area Progress Report 2013, p. 7:
Few Member States appear to have specific provisions to ensure
gender equality within their legal framework for research. In half
of the Member States incentives are developed to encourage young
women to embrace a scientific career and support female research
careers. Fewer Member States set targets particularly for gender
balance in groups and committees. Very few encourage institutions
to adopt and implement Gender Equality Plans
Member States should implement comprehensive strategies of
structural change to overcome gender gaps in research
institutions and programmes.
ERA Recommendations 2013
Statistics show that the percentage of women in higher education and in
doctoral programmes in Europe has steadily grown, yet this increase is
not reflected in the research profession and even less in decision-making
and governing bodies. The situation is not self-rectifying. (P. 9)
Eliminating gender bias from individual researcher evaluation is vital to
ensure that inefficiencies are removed from the research and innovation
system.
The first step in this is gender mainstreaming in all phases of research
and innovation policymaking, from design to evaluation, but it cannot be
reduced to policy alone; the gender dimension must be also addressed in
research programmes and projects by research teams and institutions.
Recommendations on the Implementation of
the ERA Communication 2013
Gender equality and gender mainstreaming in research requires
systematic gender mainstreaming of research and innovation (R&I)
policies, and policies and structures to foster cultural and institutional
change. Member States should enhance the availability of sexdisaggregated statistics and the Innovation Scoreboard should include the
share of female researchers in Grade A positions. It is vital to eliminate
gender bias from assessment.
We still see insufficiency in the statistics that would allow effective
monitoring of gender and research career issues, which is symptomatic
of a more general deficit in evaluation that has yet to catch up with a
period of innovation in research policy. (P. 5)
Additional problem: legal diversity in Europe and cultural diversity.
LERU on ERA Priorities
LERU priorities (An Era of Change, LERU briefing paper for EU
Institutions – May 2014):
An open labour market for researchers
Gender equality and mainstreaming in research (LERU priority 2)
Optimal circulation, access to and transfer of scientific knowledge
including via digital ERA
More effective national research systems
Optimal transnational cooperation and competition
LERU emphasizes the need for structural changes to attract and retain
women in research - in STEM areas and in senior and leadership
positions in particular, to ensure gender-balanced decision making
processes and to stimulate gender-sensitive R&I content and methods.
Gender equality and gender
mainstreaming
LERU calls upon the EU institutions to support ans stimulate
„attracting and retaining women in research (in particular but not
only in the STEM disciplines13), on ensuring gender-balanced
research decision making processes and on stimulating gendersensitive research and innovation content and methodology. This
requires significant institutional/structural commitment (e.g.
through the development, implementation and assessment of
gender action plans) and individual/behavioural changes (e.g.
through unconscious-bias awareness raising and training), and
strong partnership between governments and institutions (e.g. via
an EU Recommendation to MS).
The need for a structural change
Core area:
the suboptimal recruitment, retention and career progression of
women in research careers.
Measures:
- career-support measures, mentoring and training of researchers,
evaluators (for recruitment as yet insufficient) and administrative
staff
- transparency of recruitment policies, scouting, evaluation and
reporting criteria.
Culture: role models, acceptance of different core areas and
methodologies.
Institutional culture
Organization:
• Leadership commitment
• Recruitment transparency
• Transparency of funding
• Career and leadership training
• Gender balanced research groups
• Prevalence and evaluation of research contents.
First analyse the structures, then
change them
Need for a disciplinary approach (Warwick, Heidelberg)
First: monitor the disciplinary „leaky pipelines“ of the
individual faculties/departments/institutes, then establish
possible clusters.
Second: investigate the causes for the „leaky pipeline“;
Third: address the causes by measures and monitor the
progress.
General: assign accountability of an appropriate order to
each level of the university hierarchy.
Women, research and universities:
a story of slow progress
1. The proportion of female researchers in the EU has been growing
significantly faster than that of men (5.1% annually over 2002-2009
compared to 3.3% for men in the EU-27, She figures 2012, p.5).
2. However, „women‘s academic career remains markedly
characterized by strong vertical segregation“ (She figures 2012, p.6). In
2010:
•59% of graduates were female,
•46% of PhD graduates were female
•44% of grade C academic staff was female
•37% of grade B academic staff,
•20% of grade A academic staff (humanities 28.4%, social sciences
19.4%, vs. e.g. engineering 7.9%).
3. The glass ceiling index stood at 1.9 in 2004, at 1.8 in 2010 (SF2012)
->
structural obstacles for which targeted action is required.
Institut / Thema / Verantwortliche(r) / Position
11
Making it work: Athena
Swan cs.
Major impact of national benchmarking which
is coupled with financial consequences:
• Athena Swan
• The Equal Opportunity Offensive of the
German Research Council (since 2008):
evaluate Equal-Opportunity Plans and
refuse funding to universities with
insufficient EOP.
Institut / Thema / Verantwortliche(r) / Position
12
Tackling the sources of slow progress: an
example of a German university ranked
among the best by the Ger. Res. Council
1. Heidelberg University: indicative because it is a
comprehensive university (all specializations).
2. Steady yet slow progress 2002-2011:
• Grade A female academics in 2002 8.6% vs.
• in 2011 16%/18.6% without Medicine (German
average 15.5%);
3. Leaky pipeline:
• 51% female PhDs (Ga 44.8%)
• 27.9% (Ga 25.5%) female Postdocs
• .
Institut / Thema / Verantwortliche(r) / Position
13
The leaky pipeline of the University
of Heidelberg 2008-2010
Institut / Thema / Verantwortliche(r) / Position
14
Monitoring faculties (comparison
of three-year averages) shows:
the leaky pipeline is multifacetted
Type 1: the leaky pipeline begins at the preuniversity stage (Faculty of Physics and Astronomy;
Faculty of Mathematics and Computer Science)
-> measure: special info days for school girls
introducing them to research in these fields (socalled MINT days).
(The following chart shows by dotted lines the
Faculty‘s target values for 2011 and 2013.)
Institut / Thema / Verantwortliche(r) / Position
15
Leaky Pipeline Physics and Astronomy
The pipeline leaks from the graduation
Type 2: the pipeline leaks after the graduation (Faculties of
Law, Theology, Economics and Social Science, Chemistry
and Earth Sciences);
Different reasons:
• tenured position of lawyer or priest vs. doctoral and postdoctoral temporary positions;
• Significantly higher salaries in business and chemical
industry.
Measures: training by female scientists as role models etc.
Institut / Thema / Verantwortliche(r) / Position
17
Leaky Pipeline Economics and Social Sciences
The pipeline leaking after PhD
Type 3: the pipeline leaks after the PhD (Faculties of
Philosophy and Medicine)
Measures: scholarships for protected research time for
postdocs on university and faculty levels (acquired on a
competitive basis).
The effect of these scholarships can be demonstrated by a
comparison of the Medical Faculty Heidelberg, which has
additional faculty scholarships , and the Medical Faculty
Mannheim, wirthout them.
Institut / Thema / Verantwortliche(r) / Position
19
Leaky Pipeline Philosophy
Leaky Pipeline Medical Faculty Heidelberg
Leaky Pipeline Medical Faculty Mannheim
The pipeline leaks after the
Habilitation at the latest
Type 4: the pipeline leaks after the Habilitation
(Faculties of Modern languages and of Behavioral
and Cultural Studies).
Measures: mentoring and training towards a
professorship, possibility to apply for non-tenured
(five year) start-up professorships through financial
upgrading of existing positions (this is a general
possibility, but more frequently applied here), cofinancing of a research project on career decisions.
Institut / Thema / Verantwortliche(r) / Position
23
Leaky Pipeline Modern Languages
Mending the leaky pipeline
• There is not one solution that would fit all.
• Monitoring reveals the critical points at which
measures are needed.
• Structural change can be effective only if the
responsibilities are clearly defined and the
measures apply to the crucial points of
overt and covert discrepancies.
Institut / Thema / Verantwortliche(r) / Position
25
Making it work
Analyse the causes for the leaky pipeline
Act upon them:
- provide structures to guarantee transparent recruitment;
- eliminate conscious and unconscious bias by training the
staff and administration;
Asign accountability for plans and targets to the approrpiate
levels;
Develop methods for qualitative and quantitative evaluation;
Be specific in terms of goals, timeframes and consequences.
Incentives
Funding:
EU research funding;
National research funding;
Institutional funding related to external awards (Athena
Swan, DFG);
Examine the possibility to make the Dean‘s salary
depend in part on meeting the targets, including genderequality targets.
Communication:
Institutional self-presentation, role models, marketing.
Structure and culture:
two sides of the medal
Structural change rests on an interplay between bottom-up
and top-down forces, with a prevalence for top-down
impacts.
Recruitment, retention and promotion policies are top-down
driven.
Cultural change requires reflection and adoption of core
values for the institution, both general and discipline-specific.
Targets, incentives and monitoring are essential for cultural
and structural change.
Quantitative and qualitative indicators.